Marc Brunet Dec 10, 2017:

More on マイステップ(2/2) This 'Tetra' simulation tool is obviously used to optimize the fluid dynamics of that jet and ducting. So the focus is on the outcome which, if found satisfactory, will validate the corresponding set of parameters tested.

Since the engineers' research drive has two inseparable facets ('means' and 'pay-off', whereby it is the latter that validates the former), would have no qualms, for clarity sake, in marking that specific intent on each of these two facets. This would give us:

"The desired path for the flow ejected from its source according to custom settings is marked with check symbols."

What do you think?

Marc Brunet Dec 10, 2017:

More on マイステップ(1/2) The source of each following extract comes up on the first page googled:

各自の計画をマイステップ計画表に記入する
Personalized study programs are filled on a 'my step' plan form.
自分で選べるマイステップ学習は確実に子供たちの興味や関心を広げている。
The "My Step" study [programs] that children can put together independently certainly impresses them and broadens their interests.

Two points:

* In the above contextｓ、マイステップ may be treated as:
a) the Proper Name of a particular object class
b) as common qualifier derived from a)

* b) can denote 1 or 2 qualifiers:
1/ 'individually selected'/ 'personalized'
2/ 'sequential' like a program rather than an single outcome.

How does マイステップ work in your passage? would say: as 1/ but not 2/

Short of an explicitly defined actor, 'custom' works fine, IMO. However, マイステップ qualifies 'path of ejected flow' not 'setting'. ('Custom' collocates well with 'setting', but not as well with "path of ejected flow". So which equivalent term would work better with 'ejected flow'?)

Marc Brunet Dec 8, 2017:

Assuming the plotting device described is the subject of 付けます, could the following make sense to you, from the context you have in front of you?
Also assuming the tracking of particular blood particles radioactively marked with an isotope charge:

"If set to do so, ticks each new segment to the particle path plotted, every time the source emits a new spurt."

On the other hand, 'segment' cannot be right if the graph plotted is a scatter graph. In that case each ステップ has to be treated as a repeat 'emission', to compare the consistency or lack thereof, of a particle's first contact point/position. In this case, no need isotopic marking, either.

If on the contrary the graph is a linear plot, to track the progress of a particular blood particle, or blood flow if using calculus, when repeatedly pushed forward by the subsequent emissions presumably carried out at regular intervals ("steps"), then 'segment' might be considered, and 'tick/check' can be taken as an equivalent of 'enter/add', rather than 'confirm'...

But these are mere speculations to start the ball rolling, and for you to assess. :-)